Advisory Opinions

Professor Keith Whittington, a leading expert on academic freedom, joins Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch for a thought-provoking discussion. They delve into the complexities of originalism and its implications on current legal matters. Key topics include the evolution of academic freedom, the tension between individual rights and institutional policies, and the impact of the Stop WOKE Act. Whittington also sheds light on the challenges educators face in balancing academic integrity with political pressures, making a compelling case for reexamining constitutional protections in education.

Justice Kagan, a Supreme Court Justice known for her thought-provoking views on judicial reform, joins President Biden, who has proposed significant changes to the Supreme Court. They explore the importance of ethical standards within the court and the implications of proposed reforms. Leonard Leo, a prominent legal figure, critiques the Democratic approach to the court. The discussion touches on judicial collegiality, the evolving interpretation of Title IX, and even a lighthearted debate about the true nature of ‘boneless chicken wings.’

Join Anthony Sanders, director of the Center for Judicial Engagement at the Institute for Justice, as he takes a critical look at Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.’s controversial legacy. The discussion covers Holmes’ troubling views on eugenics and social Darwinism, his defense of sterilization, and the implications for civil rights. They also dissect the tension between judicial engagement and minimalism, and how these themes resonate in significant Supreme Court cases. Expect thought-provoking insights and a reevaluation of historical legacies.

Notre Dame law professor Derek Muller joins Sarah and David to discuss the legality of swapping party nominees, Kamala inheriting Biden's PAC money, challenges in Ohio, and the complexities of campaign finance laws. They also tackle the meaning of 'natural-born citizen,' faithless electors, and the role of political parties in primaries.

Sarah and David discuss judicial federalism, SCOTUS tech term, special counsel constitutionality, Texas pornography case, injunctions, Biden's SCOTUS reforms, and ethics violations. They also cover Judge Bibas' opinion on assault weapons, delayed expulsion vote, and elements of campaigning, podcasts, movies, and books.

Special guest David French joins to discuss Judge Cannon's decision to dismiss charges against Trump for mishandling classified documents. Topics include legality of Smith's position, DOJ's next steps, and Trump's lucky circumstances. Plus, when will Adaam embrace the Grizzlies?

Exploring the aftermath of the recent assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump, analyzing the left's response to claims of a staged event, discussing challenges and controversies surrounding security measures, reflecting on hypocrisy in politics, and navigating the current political landscape with thoughtfulness.

David French, an originalist defending the Warren Court, discusses worst-case hypotheticals and answers audience questions. Topics include faithless DNC delegates, Supreme Court legitimacy, counter-majoritarianism, and the fairness problem of the 'Stolen Seat'. They also touch on Common Good Constitutionalism, originalism, and the battle for the legal right, while exploring historical Supreme Court cases and trends in judicial perspectives.

Legal expert Kannon Shanmugam discusses big themes from the SCOTUS term, the health of the First Amendment, Justice Thomas' dissent in Rahimi, and Justice Samuel Alito's WSJ op-ed. They explore nuances in Supreme Court cases related to presidential power and immunity, Justice Barrett's position on the Court, the evolution of originalism, and challenges in media coverage. The podcast also features discussions on conservative legal thinkers, upcoming legal arguments, and a trip to Waffle House.

Topics discussed include SCOTUS immunity decision, facial challenges in Moody v. NetChoice, Section 230 debate, corporations' legal standing, Trump's legal cases, and debunking flawed scientific practices in criminal trials.